Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for four months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 4, 2018, Defendant B, who was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of eight months at the Gwangju District Court on April 4, 2018, was finally decided on the 12th of the same month.

around March 15, 2017, Defendants conspired with each other, at a cafeteria near the D factory site located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and at the victim E, “D factory site begins from April 10, 2017 to remove the D factory site, and the president of F&C has performed the construction work. The president of F&C has granted the right to dispose of the D factory site to the victim. The president of F&C requires KRW 150 million at the cost of removal construction. If E (victim) sells scrap metal as if the expenses can be legal and legal provisions, the E president would sell it to us, and have the remainder receive all of the E president. On the other hand, it would change 10% of the cost of construction work to 15 million won.”

However, at the time of fact, the above F did not decide on the removal of D factory sites, and the Defendants thought that they would receive money from the victim as the cost of removal and use it for the purpose of living expenses and repayment of debts of the defendants.

From March 24, 2017, the Defendants deceptioned the victims as above, and received KRW 15 million from the victims to the post office account (G) in Defendant B’s name.

Around November 2011, the Defendant stated to the effect that “The Defendant would pay the victim Ha with profits if he/she would receive the removal project, and would pay the proceeds if he/she would lend the cost of the project.”

However, in fact, it was unclear whether the Defendant is entitled to receive the removal project, and there was no intention or ability to pay the borrowed money to the victim even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim because it was planned not to use the borrowed money for the order to receive the removal project, but to use it for personal living expenses, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant is above.